At Crossroads -- Cf's Vision Discussion Thread - Please Vote in Poll Thread

[Debi1967]

You speak for yourself yet act like you speak for all. You won't get your structure back, not exactly the way it was anyway, because the site owner couldn't deal with the whining. From Christians.

It was a vocal minority not the general consensus that did all that whining to begin with

 

[ScottBot]

I keep everything off to keep it simple. Plus I hate the "well, your just a xxxxx, what do you know?" kinds of posts.

I actually relish those kind of posts....it begs the question, "Just exactly what does THAT mean?"

 

[intricatic]

You speak for yourself yet act like you speak for all. You won't get your structure back, not exactly the way it was anyway, because the site owner couldn't deal with the whining. From Christians.

He was sick of the whining, period. Not just from Christians. Let's keep this in context, please. I don't think you're Erwin, so I'm not sure why you're trying to speak for the man.

 

[ScottBot]

I'll ask one more time. Who dictated what you're proposing as Christian values? I don't see it in the Bible anywhere.

Oh you and that book of fairy tales.....

 

[flicka]

It was a vocal minority not the general consensus that did all that whining to begin with

Not according to Erwins announcement, at least thats not what I got out of it. The vocal minority is basically US right here right now. And I know I never complained.

 

[HadessahRose]

...I'm almost positive that the only way you could end up with a non-Christian moderating in a Christian area is if the members of that area voted for them. Currently, there are no non-Christians moderating in Christian areas, that I know of. If this is all you're worried about, I think you can relax; it's not likely to happen.

Thank you! Finally someone that is speaking with some respect. Thank you for that information! I appreciate it. Bless you. Thank you Martin.

 

[intricatic]

Not according to Erwins announcement. The vocal minority is basically US right here right now. And I know I never complained.

You must not be part of the vocal minority, then.

 

[Beastt]

I've Jesus to enlighten me, Beastt. You're not on a par with Him, I'm afriad.

Would that be the same "Jesus" who preached tolerance and defended a prostitute against the assault from a mob of Christians armed with stones who intended to injure or kill her for not adhering to their belief system?

I'm curious as to what system you think I'm promoting?

Do you understand the topic of the thread? It's talking about whether to go forward with the new CF concept or go back to the former one. You're obviously in favor of the former system which was a system dominated by bigotry.

Who am I intolerant of? Feel free to re-post an example of that.

That's why we're having this discussion. Otherwise you could simply recognize that we have differing beliefs but not assert that because my beliefs are different, I'm less entitled than you are to an equal say in how the site is managed.

Well, I've not actually mentioned what I want to see happen, as I understand I don't get to decide. In fact, I abstained from voting.

And yet you seem to have a problem with those who have chosen to exercise their right to vote and who attempt to support their reasons.

Can you say the same?

Why would I want to say the same? Is it better in some way not to have an opinion or to hide that opinion?

You're completely unaware of the irony of your feeling you can arbitrarily decide what are and aren't Christian values when you loathe how CF used to be partly for that very reason.

I've said this at least a dozen times but since you're still not getting it I'll say it again. Christian Forums has NEVER utilized the very values Christians promote as being "Christian Values". I'm wanting it to move forward with Erwin's plan to instill those values into the way the forum operates. It's Christians who seem to be uncomfortable with practicing Christian values at their "Christian site". My point is that if you're not going to practice Christian values, then it's simply not a Christian site no matter what you call it.

I feel like you're singing a nursery rhyme.

I feel like you're avoiding attempts at refuting things you know you can't refute.

I've used no labels. You've used bigot. There's no need to disprove what you're saying, because all you're expressing is opinions, and you're entitled to them. That doesn't make them correct.

Nope, sorry. You keep using the labels "hyperbole" and "rhetoric". Now you're trying to claim you're not using them.

What I'm presenting isn't just opinion. It's all over these pages. The ones most opposed to instilling a system of equality here are the Christians. That's bigotry no matter how you slice it and by accepted standards of the definition of "bigotry". So whether you like it or not, the word-use is correct and it's shown to be more than opinion. It's fully supportable.

So you've said... explain how, if you would.

I already explained this and even presented the definition of "bigotry" from Answers.com to punctuate it.


Fortunately, I still have that tab up so I'll post it again;

Bigotry, Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion: intolerance, prejudice.​

When people suggest that a nonChristian moderator can't do the job as well as a Christian moderator, they're showing intolerance and prejudice. When someone suggests that nonChristians shouldn't be allowed everywhere Christians are allowed, they're showing prejudice.

 

[Debi1967]

I don't understand what you mean that we Christians are used to structure. Can you give an example of what you are talking about?

Lisa

Ok God's Law gives us structure in how we live our lives

Our Churches give us structure in how we get together with like minded individuals

Our Beliefs bind us together as Christians .....

Now we are scattering, separating, fracturing, allowing secular influences to dictate how a Christian website should be run, how we can and should define Christians on this board.... ect

 

[MartinM]

Thank you! Finally someone that is speaking with some respect. Thank you for that information! I appreciate it. Bless you. Thank you Martin.

You're quite welcome.

And just for that, you get a cookie too.

 

[Lisa0315]

Do articulations of what we believe count for nothing, then?

Oh, they count! They definitely count.

Tell me which will be straw and which will be gold when refined by fire?

"This is a Christian site and that means Christians only!"

"This is a Christian site, and welcoming non-believers here will give us an opportunity to bring the gospel to them."

Lisa

 

[intricatic]

Would that be the same "Jesus" who preached tolerance and defended a prostitute against the assault from a mob of Christians armed with stones who intended to injure or kill her for not adhering to their belief system?

You mean the prostitute that the Pharisees had trapped into prostitution in order to bring before Christ, so they could trap Him into condemning a woman for something they, themselves did, in contravention of Moses' Law? What does that have to do with not adhering to their belief system?

 

[flicka]

You must not be part of the vocal minority, then.

I'm part of this discussion, yes. But I'm not really whining or complaining to the site owner.

 

[JimfromOhio]

Ok God's Law gives us structure in how we live our lives

Our Churches give us structure in how we get together with like minded individuals

Our Beliefs bind us together as Christians .....

Now we are scattering, separating, fracturing, allowing secular influences to dictate how a Christian website should be run, how we can and should define Christians on this board.... ect

We will have to figure out between Law and Grace.

 

[Lisa0315]

Ok God's Law gives us structure in how we live our lives

Our Churches give us structure in how we get together with like minded individuals

Our Beliefs bind us together as Christians .....

Now we are scattering, separating, fracturing, allowing secular influences to dictate how a Christian website should be run, how we can and should define Christians on this board.... ect

Sorry, hon, but while I agree that Christians do have structure in the form of Scripture and Church, this site has NEVER been one without scattering, separating, fracturing and those who would define "true" Christians. As far as the secular influence, we are in the world, but not of the world. That means we must be strong enough to resist any secular influence that tests our faith, yet able to work alongside those who do not believe as we believe.

We do not change the USA into a Christian nation by forcing Christian laws. Instead, we change the USA into a Christian nation by converting individuals.

Lisa

 

[intricatic]

Oh, they count! They definitely count.

Tell me which will be straw and which will be gold when refined by fire?

"This is a Christian site and that means Christians only!"

"This is a Christian site, and welcoming non-believers here will give us an opportunity to bring the gospel to them."

Lisa

How much do you honestly believe ministering to unbelievers over the internet will do? It might plant some seeds of thought, but it doesn't give anywhere near an accurate representation of our attitudes and actions, nor does it help propagate any kind of meaningful influence in another person's life. In my entire time online I have yet to see one meaningful conversion happen for this very reason.

This is a website; it's about words. Period. It might help a Christian to find a way to address a philosophic structure in an apologetic position in their daily lives, but it's not going to help another person to come to Christ unless that person is already interested in doing so and looking for information.

 

[kimber1]

i'm still tryin to figure out why people thnk that non christians are unable to mod properly.

 

[Debi1967]

"This is a Christian site, and welcoming non-believers here will give us an opportunity to bring the gospel to them."

Lisa this site has always had this in mind that is why there were sections of the board such as General Apologetics and such ..... This is why we had an UnOrthodox Theology section of the board as well ...

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Would that be the same "Jesus" who preached tolerance and defended a prostitute against the assault from a mob of Christians armed with stones who intended to injure or kill her for not adhering to their belief system?


Do you understand the topic of the thread? It's talking about whether to go forward with the new CF concept or go back to the former one. You're obviously in favor of the former system which was a system dominated by bigotry.


That's why we're having this discussion. Otherwise you could simply recognize that we have differing beliefs but not assert that because my beliefs are different, I'm less entitled than you are to an equal say in how the site is managed.


And yet you seem to have a problem with those who have chosen to exercise their right to vote and who attempt to support their reasons.


Why would I want to say the same? Is it better in some way not to have an opinion or to hide that opinion?


I've said this at least a dozen times but since you're still not getting it I'll say it again. Christian Forums has NEVER utilized the very values Christians promote as being "Christian Values". I'm wanting it to move forward with Erwin's plan to instill those values into the way the forum operates. It's Christians who seem to be uncomfortable with practicing Christian values at their "Christian site". My point is that if you're not going to practice Christian values, then it's simply not a Christian site no matter what you call it.


I feel like you're avoiding attempts at refuting things you know you can't refute.


Nope, sorry. You keep using the labels "hyperbole" and "rhetoric". Now you're trying to claim you're not using them.

What I'm presenting isn't just opinion. It's all over these pages. The ones most opposed to instilling a system of equality here are the Christians. That's bigotry no matter how you slice it and by accepted standards of the definition of "bigotry". So whether you like it or not, the word-use is correct and it's shown to be more than opinion. It's fully supportable.


I already explained this and even presented the definition of "bigotry" from Answers.com to punctuate it.



Fortunately, I still have that tab up so I'll post it again;

Bigotry, Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion: intolerance, prejudice.​

When people suggest that a nonChristian moderator can't do the job as well as a Christian moderator, they're showing intolerance and prejudice. When someone suggests that nonChristians shouldn't be allowed everywhere Christians are allowed, they're showing prejudice.

To be honest, it all runs together into one long post consisting of erroneous assumptions and nonsense, so I'm gonna ignore most of it and, again, ask you to post evidence of the parts I've bolded. Thankyouverymuch

 

[JimfromOhio]

Would that be the same "Jesus" who preached tolerance and defended a prostitute against the assault from a mob of Christians armed with stones who intended to injure or kill her for not adhering to their belief system?


Do you understand the topic of the thread? It's talking about whether to go forward with the new CF concept or go back to the former one. You're obviously in favor of the former system which was a system dominated by bigotry.


That's why we're having this discussion. Otherwise you could simply recognize that we have differing beliefs but not assert that because my beliefs are different, I'm less entitled than you are to an equal say in how the site is managed.


And yet you seem to have a problem with those who have chosen to exercise their right to vote and who attempt to support their reasons.


Why would I want to say the same? Is it better in some way not to have an opinion or to hide that opinion?


I've said this at least a dozen times but since you're still not getting it I'll say it again. Christian Forums has NEVER utilized the very values Christians promote as being "Christian Values". I'm wanting it to move forward with Erwin's plan to instill those values into the way the forum operates. It's Christians who seem to be uncomfortable with practicing Christian values at their "Christian site". My point is that if you're not going to practice Christian values, then it's simply not a Christian site no matter what you call it.


I feel like you're avoiding attempts at refuting things you know you can't refute.


Nope, sorry. You keep using the labels "hyperbole" and "rhetoric". Now you're trying to claim you're not using them.

What I'm presenting isn't just opinion. It's all over these pages. The ones most opposed to instilling a system of equality here are the Christians. That's bigotry no matter how you slice it and by accepted standards of the definition of "bigotry". So whether you like it or not, the word-use is correct and it's shown to be more than opinion. It's fully supportable.


I already explained this and even presented the definition of "bigotry" from Answers.com to punctuate it.



Fortunately, I still have that tab up so I'll post it again;

Bigotry, Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion: intolerance, prejudice.​

When people suggest that a nonChristian moderator can't do the job as well as a Christian moderator, they're showing intolerance and prejudice. When someone suggests that nonChristians shouldn't be allowed everywhere Christians are allowed, they're showing prejudice.

I agree.... In John 8 (King James Version), Jesus dealt with the the scribes and Pharisees of a woman committed adultery. Jesus wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.